MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXII, Issue 4311, 31 August 1921, Page 2

MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

MONDAY, AUGUST 29.

(Before Mr J. Salmon, S/M.)

DISTURBANCE ON TRAIN,

The Police proceeded against Richard Charles Parsons .and William Harkens, both of Waihi, on charges of having taken liquor on a train, being under the influence thereof, and breaking the window of a railway carriage.

Constable McLinchy said the men were wrestling in .the train, and. one of them put his arm through the window. There were several convictions against Parsons. Drinking on the train was very prevalent, and was not a nice thing in the presence of women. He asked for substantial penalties.

His Worship said these cases of drinking on the train were becoming too common, and a substantial fine would have to be inflicted. On the first charge defendants were fined £5, with costs, and on the second were ordered’to pay for the damage., 15s 6d. RIDING ON FOOTPATH. A first offender was .convicted and fined 5s and costs for riding a cycle on the footpath. RESERVED DECISIONS.

His Worship gave decisions in two cases, reserved from last court day, fully reported in the “Gazette” at the time. In the case of Marsh v. Benner, claim for cartage, Karangahaks, His Worship said the arrangements were loose in the extreme. The defendant’s objection was that there was a big disproportion between .the carting of the same material at Waihi and a A Otorohanga. He would give judgment for the plaintiff for the balance due, £l4 17s 3d, with costs, £3 13s. In the Forrest v. Smith case, His Worship said he had held that a hew tenancy was created, and the remedy for '.the permissive waste was to terminate the contract. This was according to the judgment given last court day.

The remaining matter in dispute was as to which one should pay the water rates. He found that the tenant was responsible, although it was an extraordinary thing for the landlord to have paid these rates for years. He had now to decide whether these rates paid by plaintiff could be recovered. He fpund that, under the circumstances, plaintiff could recover, and he gave judgment accordingly, for £2O, with costs £8 15s. Mr E. J. Clendon appeared in the case for plaintiff and Mr E. W, Porritt for defendant CIVIL CASES. Judgment was given for plaintiffs in the following cases : Thames Valley Dairying Co., Ltd., v. B. T. Williams, claim £177 19s Bd, costs £8 17s.

T. Gilbert Smith v. A. Coxhead, claim £6 18s, costs £1 10s 6d. Same v. E. Ngawiki, claim £1 17s 6d, costs 13s. W. Andrews and Co. v. J. Rore. claim £7 2s Id, costs £1 17s 6d. Le Manquais, Lamb and Co. v. Wharara Meneta, claim £3B 4s lid. costs £2 ,15s. JUDGMENT SUMMONSES. Farmers’ Union Trading Co., Ltd., v? P. O’Callaghan. Order given for £l2 3s, costs 10s 6d ; in default, 12 days’ imprisonment in Thames gaol..